macckone
International Hazard
Posts: 2159
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
Plastics ingestion and societial ramifications
This article isn't the standard chemophobic rantings commonly found in the main stream press. It raises the specter that we are actually poisoning
ourselves and the environment. Please try to keep the discussion chemical. If it starts getting political, I will ask the thread be locked.
Humans Are Pooping Plastic, And No One’s Certain How Bad That Is
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/plastics-and-human-heal...
|
|
|
Insertjokehere
Harmless
Posts: 1
Registered: 31-7-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
Well the media isn’t really well known for investigating “chemicals” well
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1231
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
"particles" is not a valid unit of measure, but i assume it to be extremely small given the fact that they found bottled water with 10000 "particles"
and still be considered ok
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
elementcollector1
International Hazard
Posts: 2684
Registered: 28-12-2011
Location: The Known Universe
Member Is Offline
Mood: Molten
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Ubya  | | "particles" is not a valid unit of measure, but i assume it to be extremely small given the fact that they found bottled water with 10000 "particles"
and still be considered ok |
A bastardized version of 'parts per million', maybe? Then again, 10^4 ppm is pretty significant by any standard...
EDIT: Reading the article, the 'particles' in question are plastic pieces smaller than 5mm (presumably at longest dimension). That's... a big piece of
plastic to be traveling through the human body.
[Edited on 12/10/2018 by elementcollector1]
Elements Collected:52/87
Latest Acquired: Cl
Next in Line: Nd
|
|
|
Ubya
International Hazard
Posts: 1231
Registered: 23-11-2017
Location: Rome-Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: I'm a maddo scientisto!!!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by elementcollector1 |
EDIT: Reading the article, the 'particles' in question are plastic pieces smaller than 5mm (presumably at longest dimension). That's... a big piece of
plastic to be traveling through the human body.
[Edited on 12/10/2018 by elementcollector1] |
And that's why I don't trust that definition, "20 particles per 10g of stool", if every particle was near 5mm I would be shitting plastic confetti...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to correct my grammar, or any mistakes i make
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
Tsjerk
International Hazard
Posts: 3022
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mood
|
|
Well, it says smaller than 5mm, which is a quite broad definition, anything from a molecule to half a centimeter would fit.
Second Google hit on "microplastics defenition":
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html
Where they also say toothpaste also contains these particles, I guess as scrubbing agent. My second guess is that those particles are safe as they
have to be rigorously tested before you can add them to something like toothpaste.
My next guess is the plastics themselves are not harmful, as they don't dissolve and therefore are not absorbed and end up in your toilet. The
question is where the plastics come from... not just toothpaste I guess as nine different plastics were found. I think the biggest hazard would be
additives in the plastic that dissolve and are known to be harmful like bisphenol A and its buddies.
[Edited on 10-12-2018 by Tsjerk]
|
|
|
macckone
International Hazard
Posts: 2159
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
There was also a concern that plastics are entering the blood as particles and travelling to the liver and other locations where they may physically
block organ function.
|
|
|
Tsjerk
International Hazard
Posts: 3022
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by macckone | | There was also a concern that plastics are entering the blood as particles and travelling to the liver and other locations where they may physically
block organ function. |
This is biologically impossible. If something is small enough to pass the gut into the blood it has to be smaller than a a kDa. But only if uncharged,
if not expelled by the cells lining the gut, and that is a very pessimistic estimate. If it is that small it won't physically block anything.
As far as I know the only particles capable of passing the gut without being actively (and therefore selectively) are single molecules, therefore I
think polymers are not capable of passing the gut.
|
|
|
Jackson
Hazard to Others
Posts: 189
Registered: 22-5-2018
Location: U S of A
Member Is Offline
Mood:  Happy about new glassware
|
|
I think it is fine because the microplastics tend to be rather chemically resistant (at least to HCl) and I dont think we have enzymes that will break
down the plastics, and even if bacteria in our gut could break it down, the waste products would most likely be biologically compatable. Microplastics
may cause problems for smaller organisims that rely on aspiration through their skin. If the pores are small enough (like in insects) and the plasic
big enough, then they could get clogged and suffocate. It wouldn’t necessarily be harmful to humans directly, but rather organisms farther diwn the
line. It could be a very big problem for ecosystems.
|
|
|
macckone
International Hazard
Posts: 2159
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
tsjerk, the separation of gut and blood stream is very thin, the particles can mechanically pierce the barrier. These are generally less than half
the diameter of a single cell. They literally physically damage the barrier separating the gut and blood stream.
|
|
|
Herr Haber
International Hazard
Posts: 1236
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The video also mentions nanoparticles that we breathe. That's what I'm really concerned about.
On a sidenote, I was this summer with a friend who recently had been to Nigeria. She went to fish with local fisherman.
When they started throwing shredded plastic she said "Why do you do that ? Fish dont eat plastic."
And the fisherman of course opened a fish and there it was: plastic.
It's worst than people think. Coca Cola has been actively lobbying in the EU to prevent any form of recycling at least up until 2015. There are some
very good documentaries out there to make your own opinion.
|
|
|
fusso
International Hazard
Posts: 1922
Registered: 23-6-2017
Location: 4 ∥ universes ahead of you
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber | On a sidenote, I was this summer with a friend who recently had been to Nigeria. She went to fish with local fisherman.
When they started throwing shredded plastic she said "Why do you do that ? Fish dont eat plastic."
And the fisherman of course opened a fish and there it was: plastic. |
So the natives there can speak English?
|
|
|
Herr Haber
International Hazard
Posts: 1236
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Sure, havent you received a few phishing mails from the boys from Lagos yet ? 
They also speak French. My friend being French I suspect that's the language they used.
|
|
|
Sigmatropic
Hazard to Others
Posts: 307
Registered: 29-1-2017
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by macckone | | tsjerk, the separation of gut and blood stream is very thin, the particles can mechanically pierce the barrier. These are generally less than half
the diameter of a single cell. They literally physically damage the barrier separating the gut and blood stream. |
If this were true then microplastics would cause immediate microbiosis, leading to profound signs of toxicity. Now I don't have proof to the contrary
but I don't think physical penetration of the gastrointestinal tract is not a pausible way that leads to systemic exposure to microplastics.
To be honest I would be more concerned about adsorbed toxins present on the surface of microplastics and how these are shuttled into your system.
|
|
|
macckone
International Hazard
Posts: 2159
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
Sigmatropic, according to the available literature it is true. Life is very adaptable and quite resistant to infection in spreading from the
intestine due to micro-tears. But the white blood cells eventually transport the microplastics to the liver and lymph nodes as discovered in the
original article. This leads to mechanical malfunctions of the liver. The microplastic particles are smaller than the bacteria or white blood cells.
Larger particles could lead to infection and death. This may in fact be happening and not well documented.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
